d20npcsfandomcom-20200214-history
Template talk:StatDMG2
Since a lot of people haven't been including both full attacks and standard attacks (i.e. when you attack as a standard action) in their posts I thought it was wise to split the line with an 'or' to make it clearer.Graf 02:25, 27 March 2006 (UTC) :True, people haven't been putting 'full' and 'standard', but if you look at the examples from WotC in Dungeon and elsewhere of the 'new' stat style, the melee and ranged attacks are not split into standard and full; I'm guessing it's assumed that gamers would know that if an attack has the word 'and' in it, you can only use all of them if it's a full attack action. The instances in Dungeon (which is what I have in front of me right now as reference) where the word 'or' is used in the attack line, they're referring to two alternate attacking, not a full vs. standard attack. For example, "mwk composite longbow +15/+10/+5 (2d6+10/×3) or rock +14/+9/+4 (2d6+13)" from a Fire Giant fighter 4 writeup. So, your change to the template I think is more confusing than clarifying, and deviating from the intent of the new stat method. It's implied that for each attack action, you choose one side of the 'or' and attack with that, and if you only have a standard attack, you can't use all the multiple '/'-separated attacks, only the first. :Which also brings up a question; if you're so in favor of the split attack line, why just the melee attack line and not the ranged attack line? Maybe it doesn't come up as often, but the same 'problem' would occur for that line as the melee, no? --MidnightLightning 15:12, 27 March 2006 (UTC) Since the consensus on the EnWorld thread on this topic seems to be either against or neutral on this change, I'm going to change it back, and let the users who are using the template make the choice on how they want to format that attack line. --MidnightLightning 16:52, 28 March 2006 (UTC) Subst? Should this template be subst'd, or doesn't it matter? Marasmusine 20:03, 13 March 2008 (UTC) :No, it should NOT be subst'd. Simply copy the contents of the "Usage" code box to a new page, and change the parameters to what your new character needs. See d20 NPC Wiki:NPC Templates for more info on the various templates on this site. --MidnightLightning 14:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC) Thanks. Marasmusine 17:58, 14 March 2008 (UTC) Problems I am having an extemely difficult time getting this template to work. After approximately an hour I managed to create a single NPC page (note that I already had the stats sitting on the desk in front of me when I began), but now I simply cannot make it work at all. The new NPC includes both spells and SLAs, where the first one did not. Other than that there is little substantial difference between them. My main problem seems to be with the Hit Dice section and with the Base Attack Bonus section. Is there something I might be doing wrong here? Darkxarth 15:18, 27 July 2009 (UTC) :Hit Dice, BAB, and Spells variables don't do anything special to your input within this template, though the copy-and-paste sample uses the DieRoll Template to make the BAB and Hit Dice more useful. If those are causing you grief, you can just make them basic numbers rather than a DieRoll. SLAs are split into two variables. The 'SLAcl' variable expects just a number (i.e. '10', not 'CL 10' or '10th'), while the 'SLA' variable is just text, and it's up to you to format it bold/italic/etc. What particular NPC are you having trouble with? I'll see if I can't straighten it out for you so you can see what changes are needed. --MidnightLightning 21:52, 29 July 2009 (UTC) ::I think it was the SLAcl that was screwing up my NPC, I was putting either CL 1 or 1st, I forget which. Either way, I did that character with a similar set-up, just not the convenient DMG2 Template. Darkxarth 23:58, 29 July 2009 (UTC) Semantics and Magic In response to talks with the Dungeons and Dragons Wikia wiki, I've implemented some of the features they had in use at that wiki for better sorting of creatures. As such, there will be a major reorganization needed of NPCs here, which will make this wiki more easily searchable and the two wikis better together. One of the first steps is to fix a few lingering issues with the StatDMG2 template, which involved spacing (such that the source code of the pages looks nice), and logic for inserting whitespace when only parts of the template are being used. Plus the existing system for recording spells for magic users was not inclusive of all the types of casters in the D&D system (psionics, Tome of Battle 'stances', etc.). The change I just made corrects the whitespace logic issues, and adds in automatic components for the Semantic MediaWiki plugin. However in order to fix the magic user situation I had to break compatibility for spellcasting characters. I will be working to correct those shortly as part of the reorganization (more on that shortly), but anyone else wanting to help tidy up can convert what was being recorded in the "cantripsknown, 1stprep, 2ndprep, ..., epicknown" variables all get folded into one "spells" variable whose contents can be filled using the SpellList Template. To find out which characters might need updating, take a look at the Tidy Category, the template automatically is adding pages that use the old method to that category. Shortly I'll add more functionality to change the text label from "Class Spells Prepared" to an appropriate label for alternate spellcasters, and different "SpellList" templates will pop up for them. --MidnightLightning 05:22, November 18, 2009 (UTC) Magic update I added several new templates using ideas from how the Dungeons wiki does it, to make the various 'magic' parameters more universal in the StatDMG2 template. The new methodology is to use four variables for all magical (including maneuvers and stances, spontaneous and prepared spells, etc.) abilities. Two are unchanged, SLA and SLAcl, for defining Spell-Like abilities, though using the List template to organize them can lead to some more consistency throughout the wiki. The two other areas where magical attributes are defined are in the melee section, where "spells" has been replaced with "magic" (a more general term, to cover some of the special class abilities). The contents of this variable should be what the NPC can use in combat directly. For prepared casters, that would be a list of Prepared Spells. For spontaneous casters, that would be a list of all magic effects known, and number/day designation. For prepared casters, the old "spellbook" variable has been replaced with "grim" ("grimoire"; again, a more generic term), which should be filled with a list of all spells in that NPC's grimoire(s). The main technical difference between the "magic" and "grim" compared to "spells" and "spellbook" is that the headings of Class Spells Prepared, and Spellbook are not included by default, and are instead drawn in by the new templates linked above. This allows characters with multiple spellcasting classes to have multiple "magic" entries (just stack the nested template calls up back-to-back within the "magic" variable), and high-level casters with multiple spellbooks can distinguish between them with multiple grimoire entries. I've set it up such that NPC entries that use the "spells" and "spellbook" variables will still display as they had previously, but will get a tidy banner added to the page to flag them for future cleanup. Once those are all cleaned up, that backwards-compatibility can be removed. --MidnightLightning☇(talk) 21:42, December 2, 2009 (UTC)